THE JIG IS UP… EXCLUSIVE: Local Reporter Describes Election Expert Halderman Breaking into Dominion Voting Machine and Changing Vote Totals During His Georgia Testimony (AUDIO ALSO, 20 MIN)

"Amber confirmed what was reported earlier about Halderman’s demonstration live on how to hack a Dominion voting machine and change the totals using only a pen. In fact Halderman borrowed a pen from the defense attorneys for his demonstration.

The mainstream legacy news media has decided to ignore this historic case taking place in Georgia for some reason. Why is that?

Here is more from our discussion with Amber Connor: Jim Hoft: Amber Connor, thank you for calling. I’m really anxious to hear what you had to say. Amber, you were in the courtroom for the Curling versus Raffensberger case that’s been going on since for over a week now. Maybe you could fill us in a little bit. Okay? And this explosive development that we just heard about tonight at The Gateway Pundit, which is that the expert, J. Halderman, was in the courtroom and was able to change vote totals on the Dominion machines. So maybe you could tell us a little bit about that.

Amber Connor: Just to give a background, Alex Halderman, he was the one who wrote the Halderman report that showed individuals how vulnerable the ballot marking devices that the machines that Dominion has its software on and show different ways where you can access through vulnerabilities within the ballot marking device. And a background of him is he works in Michigan. He has three degrees in computer science from Princeton University, he does security analysis of precinct programs in the US and in other countries. He’s been to Australia, India, Estonia to do these things. He’s been part of a team in California with the Secretary of State to help with forensics, and in Antrim County and in Louisiana.

When he analyzed the BMD (ballot marking device) in Georgia… And so what he did is they brought the ballot marking device and the printer up to the front (of the courtroom)… What he did is he began to show the first vulnerability and he borrowed the state defense counsel. So those representing the Georgia secretary, he asked the main counsel to borrow his pen that he was writing with. And then he goes over to the power button, leans down, he holds down the power button for between five to 10 seconds, probably 7 seconds, and it automatically puts the machine in safe mode.

…And this reboot happens. And he then shows the judge the display and it shows a picture of the on off button as he’s pushing it for five to 10 seconds to instigate the reboot. But before you reboot the whole thing there’ll be something that comes up to ask if he wants to go into safe mode, and then he pushes. Yes. So it doesn’t shut it down or reboot. He just goes into safe mode. And that allows him to open up files and change the content of files.

But that’s not all. Halderman also demonstrated how to fix the results and rig the count during an election.

Amber Connor: So you can actually install something that you’ve already pre-programmed, or you can program it at that point to do whatever you tell it to do. So that can be anything from, if they vote for George Washington, that it could then be recorded… or actually displayed as Benedict Arnold."

In Canadian Federal elections (and Canada is where Dominion Voting Machines were invented) we mark our ballots by hand and then count them, with scrutinizers from each party present for the counting.

I'm not sure why America is obsessed with technology when it comes to voting. Elections should be about getting it right, not making it easy.

Canada has used Dominion Voting machines in some municipal and provincial elections and every time they have, there have been complaints and problems.

Stop using voting machines and return to the very simple (but time consuming method) of marking your ballots by hand and then counting them... It will cost more money, but it will solve a lot of your vote counting problems.

Relying on some piece of 'modern' tech to do your counting is just plain stupid is, as stupid does.

For reference... The following images shows an example of acceptable ways to mark your ballot... And then the unacceptable way to mark your ballot... Courtesy of Elections Canada.

Acceptable

Unacceptable

Sadly... After marking our ballots by hand we still ended up with a retarded primary school teacher as our Prime Minister... But we didn't vote for him... The Liberal party made him their leader. That's their problem and we'll need to live with it until the next election, when we'll count our ballots by hand again and get rid of the Liberals and their irritating pissant leader.

Alex Halderman has three degrees in computer science from Princeton University; does security analysis of voting precinct programs in the US (and in other countries). He’s teamed for forensics analysis w/ the California Secy of State, in Antrim County, Michigan, and in Louisiana.

Alex Halderman’s Georgia report showed the vulnerability of ballot marking devices on machines on which Dominion installs its software and showed different ways one can access vote totals through vulnerabilities within the ballot marking device with nothing more than a pen:
<><>the ballot marking device and the Georgia printer were at the front of the courtroom
<><>he exposed the first vulnerability by pressing the power button down 5 maybe 7 sec
<><> this would put the machine in safe mode to effect a reboot.
<><>the judge witnesses the screen display
<><>an image of the button being pressed to ostensibly launch the reboot.
<><>but before the reboot occurs, the computer asks if he wants to go into safe mode; he selects “Yes.”
<><>that way the computer doesn’t shut down or reboot;
<><>being in safe mode allows the voter fraud
<><>it allows opening up voter files to change the content of files and change vote totals.
<><>Halderman also demonstrated how to fix the results and rig the count during an actual election.
<><>this is done remotely, by installing already pre-programmed applications for the desired result,
<><>pre-programmed applications are infinite
<><>applications can be programmed to do whatever you tell them to do.
<><>hypothetically you’d vote for George Washington,which is then recorded, even actually displayed, as you having voted for Benedict Arnold.

Why the debate over a computer scientist’s Dominion report is so heated; circa 2017

By Jessica Huseman | March 2, 2022, votebeat.org

Conspiracy theories collided in Georgia in late January, resulting in additional confusion in a long-standing lawsuit over the state’s use of Dominion voting machines. At the center of efforts by entities on both the left and right is a court-sealed report by University of Michigan computer scientist J. Alex Halderman claiming that the Dominion voting system has a vulnerability that could be exploited — but hasn’t yet — to manipulate votes in a future election.

Fox News and One America News Network are now seeking a copy of the report, and this week the Atlanta Journal-Constitution suggested Georgia’s secretary of state had ignored the report, leaving gaping holes in the state’s election system. There’s much, much more to the story. The upshot is that this lawsuit continues to be used today by those perpetuating Trump’s Big Lie as evidence of their claims.

The lawsuit was initially filed in 2017 by the left-leaning Coalition for Good Governance and a group of individual voters, to force Georgia to use paper-backed voting machines. At the time, Georgia was using outdated DRE machines. Then the state, amid the litigation and after the legislature authorized and funded new machines in early 2019, replaced the DREs in 2020 with a paper-backed voting system built by Dominion. But the lawsuit, now known as Curling v. Raffensperger, didn’t stop. It instead shifted to alleging that the new system was so insecure as to be unconstitutional.

Over four years of litigation, the plaintiffs have not succeeded in their goal of moving Georgia’s elections almost exclusively to hand-marked paper ballots. While U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg has expressed public concern over the Dominion system, she has not been persuaded to make the state abandon it. So far, Totenberg has not forced the state to make any major changes to its voting system that it wasn’t already prepared to make, even as her August 2019 order required the secretary of state to replace the DREs by the state’s 2020 deadline.

Experts who have reviewed Halderman’s report, such as Juan Gilbert, the University of Florida’s computer science department chair, have not found it to be nearly as dire as Halderman has publicly suggested. As part of the suit, Judge Totenberg granted Halderman unfettered access to the Dominion voting system in order to inspect the security of the machines. Because of his access, Totenberg sealed the report, making it available to only the attorneys on the case and the expert witnesses. And even though the state on Jan. 27 asked Totenberg to unseal the document so as to clear public confusion, she seemed unready to do so.

“I’m unhappy about the course of political treatment of the report…. it’s out of hand,” Totenberg said in court. “But I’m not going to release it without seeing what is being proposed with redactions.”

Still, the general contents of the report aren’t exactly a secret. Halderman has long claimed that ballot-marking devices could be manipulated by malicious actors. Halderman made public a high-level summary of his findings in early August. Marilyn Marks, the executive director of the Coalition for Good Governance who is among the plaintiffs in the Curling case, then distributed this summary to every county in Georgia by email the day after Halderman filed his report. Votebeat was provided with a copy of the email. She called Halderman’s finding an “urgent concern,” alarming enough for counties “to reconsider their use of BMDs this fall, and instead use hand marked paper ballots with voluntary robust audits.” No county acted on her warning.

Despite Judge Totenberg sealing Halderman’s assessment, the publicity campaign some of the plaintiffs have mounted over the report — which none of them has seen in full — has resulted in two media dustups over its contents, to the obvious discontent of Totenberg. The first was in August, when Halderman first publicized what he claimed were massive security flaws in the system, and then in late January, when the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that the state had done nothing to unseal the report or to act on its findings. This is the exact kind of speculation Totenberg sought to prevent when she sealed the report. The AJC quoted multiple people without noting which of them did or didn’t have knowledge of the report’s full details but who nonetheless implored the state to act. That’s not the responsible way to present these issues.

snip

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.